* [BUG]:WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c:122 in 2.6.26-rc1
@ 2008-05-07 18:05 Mirco Tischler
2008-05-07 18:11 ` Mirco Tischler
2008-05-07 19:06 ` Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Mirco Tischler @ 2008-05-07 18:05 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Andi Kleen, Ingo Molnar, Thomas Gleixner, lkml
Hello
I've triggered this warning in 2.6.26-rc1-git from 6th of may:
...
[11677.490019] CPU1 is down
[11677.490149] Extended CMOS year: 2000
[11677.490149] x86 PAT enabled: cpu 0, old 0x7040600070406, new
0x7010600070106
[11677.490747] Back to C!
[11677.490952] microcode: CPU0 updated from revision 0x92 to 0x92, date
= 03132007
[11677.491065] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[11677.491065] WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c:122 mach_get_cmos_time
+0x9e/0x14e()
[11677.491065] Modules linked in: i915 microcode cpufreq_userspace
cpufreq_conservative cpufreq_powersave sbs sbshc wmi aes_x86_64 dm_crypt
rtc_cmos rtc_core rtc_lib kvm_intel kvm coretemp hwmon sbp2
snd_hda_intel snd_pcm snd_page_alloc snd_hwdep pata_acpi snd_seq
firewire_ohci firewire_core tifm_7xx1 crc_itu_t snd_timer snd_seq_device
tpm_infineon tpm tpm_bios psmouse tifm_core ide_pci_generic snd
soundcore intel_agp ohci1394 ieee1394 ata_generic ehci_hcd uhci_hcd fan
fuse usbcore [last unloaded: iwl4965]
[11677.491065] Pid: 30643, comm: pm-suspend Not tainted
2.6.26-rc1-experimental #72
[11677.491065]
[11677.491065] Call Trace:
[11677.491065] [<ffffffff80235361>] warn_on_slowpath+0x51/0x8c
[11677.491065] [<ffffffff8022bb5b>] try_to_wake_up+0x1d8/0x1e9
[11677.491065] [<ffffffff8021560b>] do_machine_check+0xa4/0x3d3
[11677.491065] [<ffffffff8022c076>] __wake_up+0x38/0x4e
[11677.491065] [<ffffffff80211cdb>] mach_get_cmos_time+0x9e/0x14e
[11677.491065] [<ffffffff80211da6>] read_persistent_clock+0x1b/0x35
[11677.491065] [<ffffffff8024c101>] timekeeping_resume+0xb/0x120
[11677.491065] [<ffffffff803be5a6>] __sysdev_resume+0x16/0x43
[11677.491065] [<ffffffff803be5f9>] sysdev_resume+0x26/0x61
[11677.491065] [<ffffffff803c296a>] device_power_up+0x9/0xf
[11677.491065] [<ffffffff80257e76>] suspend_devices_and_enter
+0xbc/0x105
[11677.491065] [<ffffffff80257fef>] enter_state+0xe3/0x131
[11677.491065] [<ffffffff802580f1>] state_store+0xb4/0xd5
[11677.491065] [<ffffffff802e8b11>] sysfs_write_file+0xd0/0x107
[11677.491065] [<ffffffff802a2524>] vfs_write+0xad/0x136
[11677.491065] [<ffffffff802a2669>] sys_write+0x45/0x6e
[11677.491065] [<ffffffff8020bedb>] system_call_after_swapgs+0x7b/0x80
[11677.491065]
[11677.491065] ---[ end trace cce3eb8653db51b7 ]---
[11677.491065] Extended CMOS year: 2000
[11677.491232] Enabling non-boot CPUs ...
...
I wasn't able to reproduce the warning yet, but because the commit
message introducing the WARN_ON says:
> [ tglx@linutronix.de: changed to WARN_ON - we want to know that!
> If no one reports it we can remove the complete if (RTC_ALWAYS_BCD)
> magic, which has RTC_ALWAYS_BCD defined to 1 since Linux 1.0 ... ]
I'm reporting it anyway now.
Thanks
Mirco
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [BUG]:WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c:122 in 2.6.26-rc1
2008-05-07 18:05 [BUG]:WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c:122 in 2.6.26-rc1 Mirco Tischler
@ 2008-05-07 18:11 ` Mirco Tischler
2008-05-07 19:06 ` Thomas Gleixner
1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Mirco Tischler @ 2008-05-07 18:11 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Andi Kleen; +Cc: Ingo Molnar, Thomas Gleixner, lkml
On Mi, 2008-05-07 at 20:05 +0200, Mirco Tischler wrote:
> Hello
> I've triggered this warning in 2.6.26-rc1-git from 6th of may:
> ...
> [11677.490019] CPU1 is down
> [11677.490149] Extended CMOS year: 2000
> [11677.490149] x86 PAT enabled: cpu 0, old 0x7040600070406, new
> 0x7010600070106
> [11677.490747] Back to C!
> [11677.490952] microcode: CPU0 updated from revision 0x92 to 0x92, date
> = 03132007
> [11677.491065] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [11677.491065] WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c:122 mach_get_cmos_time
> +0x9e/0x14e()
> [11677.491065] Modules linked in: i915 microcode cpufreq_userspace
> cpufreq_conservative cpufreq_powersave sbs sbshc wmi aes_x86_64 dm_crypt
> rtc_cmos rtc_core rtc_lib kvm_intel kvm coretemp hwmon sbp2
> snd_hda_intel snd_pcm snd_page_alloc snd_hwdep pata_acpi snd_seq
> firewire_ohci firewire_core tifm_7xx1 crc_itu_t snd_timer snd_seq_device
> tpm_infineon tpm tpm_bios psmouse tifm_core ide_pci_generic snd
> soundcore intel_agp ohci1394 ieee1394 ata_generic ehci_hcd uhci_hcd fan
> fuse usbcore [last unloaded: iwl4965]
> [11677.491065] Pid: 30643, comm: pm-suspend Not tainted
> 2.6.26-rc1-experimental #72
> [11677.491065]
> [11677.491065] Call Trace:
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff80235361>] warn_on_slowpath+0x51/0x8c
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff8022bb5b>] try_to_wake_up+0x1d8/0x1e9
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff8021560b>] do_machine_check+0xa4/0x3d3
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff8022c076>] __wake_up+0x38/0x4e
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff80211cdb>] mach_get_cmos_time+0x9e/0x14e
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff80211da6>] read_persistent_clock+0x1b/0x35
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff8024c101>] timekeeping_resume+0xb/0x120
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff803be5a6>] __sysdev_resume+0x16/0x43
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff803be5f9>] sysdev_resume+0x26/0x61
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff803c296a>] device_power_up+0x9/0xf
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff80257e76>] suspend_devices_and_enter
> +0xbc/0x105
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff80257fef>] enter_state+0xe3/0x131
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff802580f1>] state_store+0xb4/0xd5
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff802e8b11>] sysfs_write_file+0xd0/0x107
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff802a2524>] vfs_write+0xad/0x136
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff802a2669>] sys_write+0x45/0x6e
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff8020bedb>] system_call_after_swapgs+0x7b/0x80
> [11677.491065]
> [11677.491065] ---[ end trace cce3eb8653db51b7 ]---
> [11677.491065] Extended CMOS year: 2000
> [11677.491232] Enabling non-boot CPUs ...
> ...
>
> I wasn't able to reproduce the warning yet, but because the commit
> message introducing the WARN_ON says:
> > [ tglx@linutronix.de: changed to WARN_ON - we want to know that!
> > If no one reports it we can remove the complete if (RTC_ALWAYS_BCD)
> > magic, which has RTC_ALWAYS_BCD defined to 1 since Linux 1.0 ... ]
> I'm reporting it anyway now.
>
> Thanks
>
> Mirco
Resend cause Andi's email has changed
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [BUG]:WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c:122 in 2.6.26-rc1
2008-05-07 18:05 [BUG]:WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c:122 in 2.6.26-rc1 Mirco Tischler
2008-05-07 18:11 ` Mirco Tischler
@ 2008-05-07 19:06 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-05-07 19:32 ` Mirco Tischler
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2008-05-07 19:06 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Mirco Tischler; +Cc: Andi Kleen, Ingo Molnar, lkml
On Wed, 7 May 2008, Mirco Tischler wrote:
> Hello
> I've triggered this warning in 2.6.26-rc1-git from 6th of may:
> ...
> [11677.490019] CPU1 is down
> [11677.490149] Extended CMOS year: 2000
> [11677.490149] x86 PAT enabled: cpu 0, old 0x7040600070406, new
> 0x7010600070106
> [11677.490747] Back to C!
> [11677.490952] microcode: CPU0 updated from revision 0x92 to 0x92, date
> = 03132007
> [11677.491065] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [11677.491065] WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c:122 mach_get_cmos_time
> +0x9e/0x14e()
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff80211cdb>] mach_get_cmos_time+0x9e/0x14e
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff80211da6>] read_persistent_clock+0x1b/0x35
> [11677.491065] [<ffffffff8024c101>] timekeeping_resume+0xb/0x120
Interesting. That's in the resume path.
> I wasn't able to reproduce the warning yet, but because the commit
> message introducing the WARN_ON says:
This is a WARN_ON_ONCE so you only see it once per boot. Resume does
not count :) You might change that WARN_ON_ONCE to WARN_ON to check
whether it happens more than once.
> > [ tglx@linutronix.de: changed to WARN_ON - we want to know that!
> > If no one reports it we can remove the complete if (RTC_ALWAYS_BCD)
> > magic, which has RTC_ALWAYS_BCD defined to 1 since Linux 1.0 ... ]
> I'm reporting it anyway now.
Thanks. That's why I put the WARN_ON there. The backtrace attracts
attention and it's also an interesting info that this did not happen
on boot, where we read out the RTC as well.
Can you please provide some details about the system ?
Thanks,
tglx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [BUG]:WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c:122 in 2.6.26-rc1
2008-05-07 19:06 ` Thomas Gleixner
@ 2008-05-07 19:32 ` Mirco Tischler
2008-05-07 20:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Mirco Tischler @ 2008-05-07 19:32 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Thomas Gleixner; +Cc: Ingo Molnar, lkml, Andi Kleen
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1549 bytes --]
On Mi, 2008-05-07 at 21:06 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > [11677.490019] CPU1 is down
> > [11677.490149] Extended CMOS year: 2000
> > [11677.490149] x86 PAT enabled: cpu 0, old 0x7040600070406, new
> > 0x7010600070106
> > [11677.490747] Back to C!
> > [11677.490952] microcode: CPU0 updated from revision 0x92 to 0x92, date
> > = 03132007
> > [11677.491065] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > [11677.491065] WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c:122 mach_get_cmos_time
> > +0x9e/0x14e()
>
> > [11677.491065] [<ffffffff80211cdb>] mach_get_cmos_time+0x9e/0x14e
> > [11677.491065] [<ffffffff80211da6>] read_persistent_clock+0x1b/0x35
> > [11677.491065] [<ffffffff8024c101>] timekeeping_resume+0xb/0x120
>
> Interesting. That's in the resume path.
>
> > I wasn't able to reproduce the warning yet, but because the commit
> > message introducing the WARN_ON says:
>
> This is a WARN_ON_ONCE so you only see it once per boot. Resume does
> not count :) You might change that WARN_ON_ONCE to WARN_ON to check
> whether it happens more than once.
The problem is that I am currently not able to reproduce it. I've tried
~10 suspends & resumes till now. With a reboot in between. Will try some
more testing with WARN_ON though.
> Can you please provide some details about the system ?
This is a Zepto notebook with Intel chipset (santa rosa generation) and
core2duo cpu. I'm running Ubuntu 8.04 x86_64. I attach a lspci output.
Just ask if you need more specific information.
> Thanks,
> tglx
Thanks
Mirco
[-- Attachment #1.2: lspci --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2451 bytes --]
00:00.0 Host bridge: Intel Corporation Mobile PM965/GM965/GL960 Memory Controller Hub (rev 03)
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Mobile GM965/GL960 Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 03)
00:02.1 Display controller: Intel Corporation Mobile GM965/GL960 Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 03)
00:1a.0 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) USB UHCI Controller #4 (rev 03)
00:1a.1 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) USB UHCI Controller #5 (rev 03)
00:1a.7 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) USB2 EHCI Controller #2 (rev 03)
00:1b.0 Audio device: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) HD Audio Controller (rev 03)
00:1c.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) PCI Express Port 1 (rev 03)
00:1c.1 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) PCI Express Port 2 (rev 03)
00:1c.2 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) PCI Express Port 3 (rev 03)
00:1c.3 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) PCI Express Port 4 (rev 03)
00:1d.0 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) USB UHCI Controller #1 (rev 03)
00:1d.1 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) USB UHCI Controller #2 (rev 03)
00:1d.2 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) USB UHCI Controller #3 (rev 03)
00:1d.7 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) USB2 EHCI Controller #1 (rev 03)
00:1e.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801 Mobile PCI Bridge (rev f3)
00:1f.0 ISA bridge: Intel Corporation 82801HEM (ICH8M) LPC Interface Controller (rev 03)
00:1f.1 IDE interface: Intel Corporation 82801HBM/HEM (ICH8M/ICH8M-E) IDE Controller (rev 03)
00:1f.2 SATA controller: Intel Corporation 82801HBM/HEM (ICH8M/ICH8M-E) SATA AHCI Controller (rev 03)
00:1f.3 SMBus: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) SMBus Controller (rev 03)
02:00.0 Ethernet controller: Broadcom Corporation NetLink BCM5787M Gigabit Ethernet PCI Express (rev 02)
04:00.0 Network controller: Intel Corporation PRO/Wireless 4965 AG or AGN Network Connection (rev 61)
06:06.0 CardBus bridge: Texas Instruments PCIxx12 Cardbus Controller
06:06.1 FireWire (IEEE 1394): Texas Instruments PCIxx12 OHCI Compliant IEEE 1394 Host Controller
06:06.2 Mass storage controller: Texas Instruments 5-in-1 Multimedia Card Reader (SD/MMC/MS/MS PRO/xD)
06:06.3 SD Host controller: Texas Instruments PCIxx12 SDA Standard Compliant SD Host Controller
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [BUG]:WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c:122 in 2.6.26-rc1
2008-05-07 19:32 ` Mirco Tischler
@ 2008-05-07 20:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-05-07 21:46 ` Mirco Tischler
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2008-05-07 20:58 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Mirco Tischler; +Cc: Ingo Molnar, lkml, Andi Kleen
On Wed, 7 May 2008, Mirco Tischler wrote:
> On Mi, 2008-05-07 at 21:06 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > [11677.490019] CPU1 is down
> > > [11677.490149] Extended CMOS year: 2000
> > > [11677.490149] x86 PAT enabled: cpu 0, old 0x7040600070406, new
> > > 0x7010600070106
> > > [11677.490747] Back to C!
> > > [11677.490952] microcode: CPU0 updated from revision 0x92 to 0x92, date
> > > = 03132007
That's an odd one: updated from revision 0x92 to 0x92
It's right before the warning triggers. Is this microcode message in
all your boot/resume logs ?
> Just ask if you need more specific information.
See above ::
Thanks,
tglx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [BUG]:WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c:122 in 2.6.26-rc1
2008-05-07 20:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
@ 2008-05-07 21:46 ` Mirco Tischler
2008-05-07 22:03 ` Andi Kleen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Mirco Tischler @ 2008-05-07 21:46 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Thomas Gleixner; +Cc: Ingo Molnar, lkml, Andi Kleen
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1506 bytes --]
On Mi, 2008-05-07 at 22:58 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 7 May 2008, Mirco Tischler wrote:
>
> > On Mi, 2008-05-07 at 21:06 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > [11677.490019] CPU1 is down
> > > > [11677.490149] Extended CMOS year: 2000
> > > > [11677.490149] x86 PAT enabled: cpu 0, old 0x7040600070406, new
> > > > 0x7010600070106
> > > > [11677.490747] Back to C!
> > > > [11677.490952] microcode: CPU0 updated from revision 0x92 to 0x92, date
> > > > = 03132007
>
> That's an odd one: updated from revision 0x92 to 0x92
>
> It's right before the warning triggers. Is this microcode message in
> all your boot/resume logs ?
Yes, wondered about that too. It's defintely not on all resumes. But it
is on more than that single one triggering the warning:
May 7 19:53:21 kernel: [4307505.090195] Extended CMOS year: 2000
May 7 19:53:21 kernel: [4307505.090195] x86 PAT enabled: cpu 0, old 0x7040600070406, new 0x7010600070106
May 7 19:53:21 kernel: [4307505.090195] Back to C!
May 7 19:53:21 kernel: [4307505.090195] microcode: CPU0 updated from revision 0x92 to 0x92, date = 03132007
May 7 19:53:21 kernel: [4307505.090195] Extended CMOS year: 2000
May 7 21:52:04 kernel: [4294896.091827] Extended CMOS year: 2000
May 7 21:52:04 kernel: [4294896.091827] x86 PAT enabled: cpu 0, old 0x7040600070406, new 0x7010600070106
May 7 21:52:04 kernel: [4294896.091827] Back to C!
May 7 21:52:04 kernel: [4294896.091827] Extended CMOS year: 2000
Thanks
Mirco
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [BUG]:WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c:122 in 2.6.26-rc1
2008-05-07 21:46 ` Mirco Tischler
@ 2008-05-07 22:03 ` Andi Kleen
2008-05-08 10:12 ` Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Andi Kleen @ 2008-05-07 22:03 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Mirco Tischler; +Cc: Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar, lkml
> May 7 21:52:04 kernel: [4294896.091827] Extended CMOS year: 2000
> May 7 21:52:04 kernel: [4294896.091827] x86 PAT enabled: cpu 0, old 0x7040600070406, new 0x7010600070106
> May 7 21:52:04 kernel: [4294896.091827] Back to C!
> May 7 21:52:04 kernel: [4294896.091827] Extended CMOS year: 2000
If the data is read correctly (and it looks like it) then just the bit
is wrong and we should ignore it I guess. So just remove the
WARN_ON_ONCE()?
-Andi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [BUG]:WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c:122 in 2.6.26-rc1
2008-05-07 22:03 ` Andi Kleen
@ 2008-05-08 10:12 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-05-08 10:52 ` Andi Kleen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2008-05-08 10:12 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Andi Kleen; +Cc: Mirco Tischler, Ingo Molnar, lkml
On Thu, 8 May 2008, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> > May 7 21:52:04 kernel: [4294896.091827] Extended CMOS year: 2000
> > May 7 21:52:04 kernel: [4294896.091827] x86 PAT enabled: cpu 0, old 0x7040600070406, new 0x7010600070106
> > May 7 21:52:04 kernel: [4294896.091827] Back to C!
> > May 7 21:52:04 kernel: [4294896.091827] Extended CMOS year: 2000
>
> If the data is read correctly (and it looks like it) then just the bit
> is wrong and we should ignore it I guess. So just remove the
> WARN_ON_ONCE()?
You put a printk there in the first place :) I changed it to
WARN_ON_ONCE as one line printks are more likely to be ignored.
I'm all for it to remove the while BCD check, which is hardcoded to
ALWAYS_BCD = 1 since linux 1.0.
This oddball case is interesting as it just triggered once and it
looks more like a hardware glitch than something we need to worry
about.
Thanks,
tglx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [BUG]:WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c:122 in 2.6.26-rc1
2008-05-08 10:12 ` Thomas Gleixner
@ 2008-05-08 10:52 ` Andi Kleen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Andi Kleen @ 2008-05-08 10:52 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Thomas Gleixner; +Cc: Mirco Tischler, Ingo Molnar, lkml
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 8 May 2008, Andi Kleen wrote:
>>> May 7 21:52:04 kernel: [4294896.091827] Extended CMOS year: 2000
>>> May 7 21:52:04 kernel: [4294896.091827] x86 PAT enabled: cpu 0, old 0x7040600070406, new 0x7010600070106
>>> May 7 21:52:04 kernel: [4294896.091827] Back to C!
>>> May 7 21:52:04 kernel: [4294896.091827] Extended CMOS year: 2000
>> If the data is read correctly (and it looks like it) then just the bit
>> is wrong and we should ignore it I guess. So just remove the
>> WARN_ON_ONCE()?
>
> You put a printk there in the first place :) I changed it to
> WARN_ON_ONCE as one line printks are more likely to be ignored.
Ignoring would have been fine here, but point taken.
> I'm all for it to remove the while BCD check, which is hardcoded to
> ALWAYS_BCD = 1 since linux 1.0.
Fine for me.
-Andi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-05-08 10:52 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-05-07 18:05 [BUG]:WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c:122 in 2.6.26-rc1 Mirco Tischler
2008-05-07 18:11 ` Mirco Tischler
2008-05-07 19:06 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-05-07 19:32 ` Mirco Tischler
2008-05-07 20:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-05-07 21:46 ` Mirco Tischler
2008-05-07 22:03 ` Andi Kleen
2008-05-08 10:12 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-05-08 10:52 ` Andi Kleen
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.